Rohitasava Chand v. CIT

306 ITR 242High Court2008#1944 most cited

What is Rohitasava Chand v. CIT authority for?

Receipt of a non-compete fee, even if it does not alter the assessee's business structure, impairs the carrying on of their activity, constituting a loss of a source of income.

59

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Rohitasava Chand v. CIT · non-compete fee · capital receipt · loss of source of income · impairment of business · section 28(va) · section 55 · taxability of non-compete fee · characterisation of receipt · rule of consistency · 306 ITR 242

Also reported as

171 Taxmann 147

Sections most often in play

Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234ESection 271HSection 154Section 194IASection 201(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 28(va)section 295non-compete feesection 55(2)carry forward of lossesscheme of arrangementsection 55rule of consistencysection 2(14)business expediencysection 260revenue expenditure

Judgments citing Rohitasava Chand v. CIT

Bathline India (P) Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT - CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 9336/DEL/2019[2013-14 (24Q-Q1)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 54

…C considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT (1992] 60 taxman 248(SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii) Anup Sharma vs Addl CIT, ITA No.l61/CHD/2012, order clt.26.08.2014 of ITAT, Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) (iv) K K Khullar vs DCIT [2009] 116 ITD 301(Delhi) (v) Dwarkadas Kesardeo Morarka vs CIT [1962] 44 ITR 529 (SC) 8. The ld. DR drew the attention of the Bench to t…

Aircon Engineers Private Limited, New Delhi vs. TDS, CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 9069/DEL/2019[2014-15 (Qtr-4,26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 271Section 271H

…considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT (1992] 60 taxman 248(SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii) Anup Sharma vs Addl CIT, ITA No.l61/CHD/2012, order clt.26.08.2014 of ITAT, Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) (iv) K K Khullar vs DCIT [2009] 116 ITD 301(Delhi) (v) Dwarkadas Kesardeo Morarka vs CIT [1962] 44 ITR 529 (SC) 5. The ld. DR drew the attention of the Bench to…

Anjani Technoplast Limited., New Delhi vs. ACIT - TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 7952/DEL/2019[2015-16 (26Q, Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 54

…considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT (1992] 60 taxman 248(SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii) Anup Sharma vs Addl CIT, ITA No.l61/CHD/2012, order clt.26.08.2014 of ITAT, Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) (iv) K K Khullar vs DCIT [2009] 116 ITD 301(Delhi) (v) Dwarkadas Kesardeo Morarka vs CIT [1962] 44 ITR 529 (SC) 8. The ld. DR drew the attention of the Bench to…

Anjani Technoplast Limited., New Delhi vs. ACIT - TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 7951/DEL/2019[2015-16 (26Q, Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 54

…considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT (1992] 60 taxman 248(SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii) Anup Sharma vs Addl CIT, ITA No.l61/CHD/2012, order clt.26.08.2014 of ITAT, Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) (iv) K K Khullar vs DCIT [2009] 116 ITD 301(Delhi) (v) Dwarkadas Kesardeo Morarka vs CIT [1962] 44 ITR 529 (SC) 8. The ld. DR drew the attention of the Bench to…

Anjani Technoplast Limited., New Delhi vs. ACIT - TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 7950/DEL/2019[2015-16 (26Q, Q1)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 54

…considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT (1992] 60 taxman 248(SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii) Anup Sharma vs Addl CIT, ITA No.l61/CHD/2012, order clt.26.08.2014 of ITAT, Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) (iv) K K Khullar vs DCIT [2009] 116 ITD 301(Delhi) (v) Dwarkadas Kesardeo Morarka vs CIT [1962] 44 ITR 529 (SC) 8. The ld. DR drew the attention of the Bench to…

Anjani Technoplast Limited., New Delhi vs. ACIT - TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 7949/DEL/2019[2015-16 (24Q, Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 54

…considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT (1992] 60 taxman 248(SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii) Anup Sharma vs Addl CIT, ITA No.l61/CHD/2012, order clt.26.08.2014 of ITAT, Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) (iv) K K Khullar vs DCIT [2009] 116 ITD 301(Delhi) (v) Dwarkadas Kesardeo Morarka vs CIT [1962] 44 ITR 529 (SC) 8. The ld. DR drew the attention of the Bench to…

Anjani Technoplast Limited., New Delhi vs. ACIT - TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 7948/DEL/2019[2015-16 (24Q, Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 54

…considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT (1992] 60 taxman 248(SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii) Anup Sharma vs Addl CIT, ITA No.l61/CHD/2012, order clt.26.08.2014 of ITAT, Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) (iv) K K Khullar vs DCIT [2009] 116 ITD 301(Delhi) (v) Dwarkadas Kesardeo Morarka vs CIT [1962] 44 ITR 529 (SC) 8. The ld. DR drew the attention of the Bench to…

Anjani Technoplast Limited., New Delhi vs. ACIT - TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 7947/DEL/2019[2015-16(24Q, Q1)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 54

…considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT (1992] 60 taxman 248(SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii) Anup Sharma vs Addl CIT, ITA No.l61/CHD/2012, order clt.26.08.2014 of ITAT, Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) (iv) K K Khullar vs DCIT [2009] 116 ITD 301(Delhi) (v) Dwarkadas Kesardeo Morarka vs CIT [1962] 44 ITR 529 (SC) 8. The ld. DR drew the attention of the Bench to…

Anjani Technoplast Limited., New Delhi vs. ACIT - TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 7946/DEL/2019[2014-15(27EQ, Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 54

…considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT (1992] 60 taxman 248(SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii) Anup Sharma vs Addl CIT, ITA No.l61/CHD/2012, order clt.26.08.2014 of ITAT, Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) (iv) K K Khullar vs DCIT [2009] 116 ITD 301(Delhi) (v) Dwarkadas Kesardeo Morarka vs CIT [1962] 44 ITR 529 (SC) 8. The ld. DR drew the attention of the Bench to…

Anjani Technoplast Limited., New Delhi vs. ACIT - TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 7945/DEL/2019[2014-15(Q4, 26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 54

…considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT (1992] 60 taxman 248(SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii) Anup Sharma vs Addl CIT, ITA No.l61/CHD/2012, order clt.26.08.2014 of ITAT, Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) (iv) K K Khullar vs DCIT [2009] 116 ITD 301(Delhi) (v) Dwarkadas Kesardeo Morarka vs CIT [1962] 44 ITR 529 (SC) 8. The ld. DR drew the attention of the Bench to…

Anjani Technoplast Limited., New Delhi vs. ACIT - TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 7937/DEL/2019[2013-14 (27Q, Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 54

…considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT (1992] 60 taxman 248(SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii) Anup Sharma vs Addl CIT, ITA No.l61/CHD/2012, order clt.26.08.2014 of ITAT, Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) (iv) K K Khullar vs DCIT [2009] 116 ITD 301(Delhi) (v) Dwarkadas Kesardeo Morarka vs CIT [1962] 44 ITR 529 (SC) 8. The ld. DR drew the attention of the Bench to…

Anjani Technoplast Limited., New Delhi vs. ACIT - TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 7936/DEL/2019[2013-14 (26Q, Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 54

…considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT (1992] 60 taxman 248(SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii) Anup Sharma vs Addl CIT, ITA No.l61/CHD/2012, order clt.26.08.2014 of ITAT, Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) (iv) K K Khullar vs DCIT [2009] 116 ITD 301(Delhi) (v) Dwarkadas Kesardeo Morarka vs CIT [1962] 44 ITR 529 (SC) 8. The ld. DR drew the attention of the Bench to…

Anjani Technoplast Limited., New Delhi vs. ACIT - TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 7935/DEL/2019[2013-14 (26Q, Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 54

…considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT (1992] 60 taxman 248(SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii) Anup Sharma vs Addl CIT, ITA No.l61/CHD/2012, order clt.26.08.2014 of ITAT, Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) (iv) K K Khullar vs DCIT [2009] 116 ITD 301(Delhi) (v) Dwarkadas Kesardeo Morarka vs CIT [1962] 44 ITR 529 (SC) 8. The ld. DR drew the attention of the Bench to…

Anjani Technoplast Limited., New Delhi vs. ACIT - TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 7934/DEL/2019[2013-14 (26Q, Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 54

…considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT (1992] 60 taxman 248(SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii) Anup Sharma vs Addl CIT, ITA No.l61/CHD/2012, order clt.26.08.2014 of ITAT, Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) (iv) K K Khullar vs DCIT [2009] 116 ITD 301(Delhi) (v) Dwarkadas Kesardeo Morarka vs CIT [1962] 44 ITR 529 (SC) 8. The ld. DR drew the attention of the Bench to…

Anjani Technoplast Limited., New Delhi vs. ACIT - TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 7933/DEL/2019[2013-14 (24Q, Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 54

…considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT (1992] 60 taxman 248(SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii) Anup Sharma vs Addl CIT, ITA No.l61/CHD/2012, order clt.26.08.2014 of ITAT, Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) (iv) K K Khullar vs DCIT [2009] 116 ITD 301(Delhi) (v) Dwarkadas Kesardeo Morarka vs CIT [1962] 44 ITR 529 (SC) 8. The ld. DR drew the attention of the Bench to…

Anjani Technoplast Limited., New Delhi vs. ACIT - TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 7932/DEL/2019[2013-14 (Q3, 24Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 54

…considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT (1992] 60 taxman 248(SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii) Anup Sharma vs Addl CIT, ITA No.l61/CHD/2012, order clt.26.08.2014 of ITAT, Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) (iv) K K Khullar vs DCIT [2009] 116 ITD 301(Delhi) (v) Dwarkadas Kesardeo Morarka vs CIT [1962] 44 ITR 529 (SC) 8. The ld. DR drew the attention of the Bench to…

Anjani Technoplast Limited., New Delhi vs. ACIT - TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 7931/DEL/2019[2013-14 (24Q, Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 54

…considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT (1992] 60 taxman 248(SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii) Anup Sharma vs Addl CIT, ITA No.l61/CHD/2012, order clt.26.08.2014 of ITAT, Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) (iv) K K Khullar vs DCIT [2009] 116 ITD 301(Delhi) (v) Dwarkadas Kesardeo Morarka vs CIT [1962] 44 ITR 529 (SC) 8. The ld. DR drew the attention of the Bench to…

Brahmaputra Property Management Services Private Limited, New Delhi vs. TDS, CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 6718/DEL/2019[2013-14,26Q]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

…considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT (1992] 60 taxman 248(SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii) Anup Sharma vs Addl CIT, ITA No.l61/CHD/2012, order clt.26.08.2014 of ITAT, Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) (iv) K K Khullar vs DCIT [2009] 116 ITD 301(Delhi) (v) Dwarkadas Kesardeo Morarka vs CIT [1962] 44 ITR 529 (SC) 5. The ld. DR drew the attention of the Bench to…

Draipl-Brahmaputra Infrastructure Limited (Jv), New Delhi vs. TDS, CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 6709/DEL/2019[2013-14, 26Q]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

…considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT (1992] 60 taxman 248(SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii) Anup Sharma vs Addl CIT, ITA No.l61/CHD/2012, order clt.26.08.2014 of ITAT, Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) (iv) K K Khullar vs DCIT [2009] 116 ITD 301(Delhi) (v) Dwarkadas Kesardeo Morarka vs CIT [1962] 44 ITR 529 (SC) 5. The ld. DR drew the attention of the Bench to…

Supreme Brahmaputra (Jv), New Delhi vs. ACIT - CPC - TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 6706/DEL/2019[2013-14 (26Q, Q-4)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

…considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT (1992] 60 taxman 248(SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand [2008] 306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii) Anup Sharma vs Addl CIT, ITA No.l61/CHD/2012, order clt.26.08.2014 of ITAT, Chandigarh (iii) Meeraj Estate & Developers vs DCIT [2014] 44 taxraann.com 431 (ITAT, Agra) (iv) K K Khullar vs DCIT [2009] 116 ITD 301(Delhi) (v) Dwarkadas Kesardeo Morarka vs CIT [1962] 44 ITR 529 (SC) 5. The ld. DR drew the attention of the Bench to…